Friday, 14 July 2017

MORE VATICAN MONEY MISUSED


Vatican charges two ex-officials over funding for Cardinal Bertone’s apartment


Bertone (left) and Profiti (right


Vatican prosecutors are pressing charges against two former leaders of the Vatican-run Bambino Gesu hospital for allegedly redirecting funds from the hospital’s foundation to pay for renovations of former Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone’s apartment.

Pubblicato il 13/07/2017
Ultima modifica il 13/07/2017 alle ore 15:06
JOSHUA J. MCELWEE
VATICAN CITY

The Vatican announced indictments Thursday against Giuseppe Profiti, the former president of the hospital, and Massimo Spina, its former treasurer. The two have been ordered to stand trial starting July 18. 

The announcement alleges the two ex-officials “used money belonging to the Bambino Gesu Foundation in an illicit way.” It specifies that they allegedly paid more than 422,000 Euro “to restore a building ... meant as the residence of the emeritus Secretary of State.” 


THE BERTONE APARTMENT!


The Vatican had announced the investigation of Profiti and Spina in March 2016. Greg Burke, the director of the Holy See Press Office, said at the time that Bertone himself was not facing an inquiry. 

While Bertone has not admitted any guilt in the matter, he made a large donation of 150,000 Euro to the Bambino Gesu in December 2015 after the publishing of a book in Italy detailed the spending on his apartment. 

The cardinal, who essentially served as the Vatican’s number two official after the pope from 2006 through October 2013, has been criticized for combining two previous apartments inside the Vatican into one reportedly 6,500 square foot residence. 


Image result for cardinal bertone

Bertone does not currently hold any significant office at the Vatican. He served as the secretary of state under Pope Benedict XVI and for the first few months of Francis’ pontificate, before being replaced by Italian Cardinal Pietro Parolin. 

Thursday’s announcement says the alleged criminal funding by Profiti and Spina took place at the Vatican between November 2013 and May 28, 2014. 


The Bambino Gesu was the subject of a recent investigation by the Associated Press that reported that conditions at the hospital under Profiti’s leadership had put children unnecessarily at harm’s risk. Burke told the AP for its reporting that it was “false and unjust to suggest that there are serious threats to the health of children at Bambino Gesu.” 

PAT SAYS:

Cardinal Bertone is now 82. He was nearly 80 when Francis relieved him of being the second in command at the Vatican.

What would man of God do when he retired at 80?

He would start saying extra prayers knowing that his time to meet his Master was getting near indeed.

What did corrupt Bertone do?

He decided to increase his already large apartment and increase it by two.

To achieve this he took the next door apartment off a sick monsignor and extended his own into it.

The renovation work cost God knows how much.

We do know his new kitchen cost him £50,000.

When Pope Francis heard about it he asked: "Is it made of gold"?



Image result for gold kitchens
Now we know that £500,000 went missing from the Vatican Children's Hospital - Bambino Gesu - to finance Bertone's apartment.

Two officials are being charged. Ould Bertone is getting away with it.


The Vatican and Catholic dioceses around the world have millions - if not billions - hidden away in banks and investments.

Yet they still ask their followers for more and more money each week.

And the ejits keep giving it.

It's like bringing sand - or oil - to the Saudis. 




Cardinals, bishops and clergy continue to build palaces, fly business and first class, erect fabulous retirement pads, but gold threaded vestments etc - and Joe and Mary Public are paying for it - thinking that their money is going to do "good". 


Image result for expensive bishops mitres

And the boys are laughing all the way to the bank!


113 comments:

  1. Tell us Pat the Honest - how much do you charge for weddings? I'm sure you get more than 100/150 euro which is what most clerics may/may not get! And now it has to be totally recorded, declared and presented as income for revenue. Do you follow these principles? Another story for you to use to smear all honest priests. Go to sleep you fool.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pat can you disclose your full tax affairs to both the Republic and UK revenue offices?

      Delete
    2. I submit a full tax return each year to the British tax man as I live in the "UK".

      Delete
    3. 00:14 A "normal" priest gets 100/150 Euros a wedding ON TOP of his Euro 20,000 + annual salary + benefits.

      I have no annual salary from anyone and have not had any money from the RC gang for 31 years.

      I get £300 a wedding when people can afford it and are spending 10,000 to 30,000 in their wedding.

      When I marry less well off people they put what they can afford in an envelope.

      I declare all wedding income to the tax man.

      Delete
    4. Is it cash or cheque? Also do you have charitable status. Regarding the Republic, you are earning money in the south and not paying tax on it. That is in direct contradiction to the teaching of Christ.

      Delete
    5. 'Normal' priests, as you condescendingly call them, do not all get 20k plus a year. It varies from diocese to diocese you liar.

      Delete
    6. I know. From 15,000 to 30,000. But my point still stands.

      Delete
    7. 11:25 ,People living in N. Ireland and working in ROI can legally decide where to do their tax returns.

      I also receive wedding fees from people from Scotland, England, the US and all around the world.

      I do my tax return in the jurisdiction in which I live. Simple.

      The Bible says: "The labourer is worthy of his wages".

      Do you work for nothing?

      You show a great ignorance in many areas.

      Ever thought of going to night classes :-)

      Delete
    8. Why such an interest in how much you make. Seems you are presumed guilty until proved innocent by some. I suppose many priests are viewed the same sad to say. I suggest balance. Praise what is good Denounce what is bad

      Delete
  2. Maybe now the moronic, servile, uncritical elderly who, traditionally, have financially fed the evil Roman beast will at least pause to reconsider the utter stupidity of their conduct, but I, sadly, doubt it, because there are no fools like utterly USELESS old fools.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MourneManMichael15 July 2017 at 11:14

      Magna, while you are probably right that it is uncritical and servile persons who financially feed the RC church, perhaps you could have phrased it better by omitting a reference to the elderly. As written, it could be taken that there is a causative link between the fact of being elderly and the negative 'attributes' you refer to. Certainly referring to "utterly useless old fools" can be seen as hostile and ageist.
      I'm 73 myself, and probably regarded as 'elderly' by some, but whether they agree or not, I certainly believe my neurones are sparking fairly well.
      And by the way, I've not contributed in any way to the RC church, or any religious organisation since I was about 24. I prefer a standing order to PLAN International, a childrens charity whose probity I checked upon quitting OXFAM about 20 years ago after its incessant requests for more money!
      MMM

      Delete
    2. Most Catholics I know are incredibly naïve. They pay the priest so they won't have to think....about anything. That way they will get to heaven for £? a month. They just follow the script.

      Delete
    3. MMM, the troll MC can't help himself - he lapses into vitriol so easily and - yes - he is racist and ageist.

      MC, for some very odd reason, is allowed free range on here by Pat Buckley, to be a domineering loud mouth.

      MC is also very afraid of his identity being discovered. I wonder why that is?

      Does Pat Buckley know who MC is? Or does MC not trust PB either? Trolls tend to keep the owners of sites they troll on sweet by licking up to them. MC does this with PB all the time. It's quite bizarre - this MC troll carry on.

      MC is quite inconsistent and even unhinged at times. The other day he got stuck into Fr Oko for his views on homosexuality presented without hard evidence. In the same breath, without hard evidence, he scathingly turns on "the German" and "the Pole" (examples of his racism), for "protecting" child abusers.

      There is no "evidence" that JPII and BXVI knowingly "protected" child abusers. There are accusations that they did. There is plenty to suggest that JPII - along with millions of others - didn't "get" (have any understanding of) child abuse - just like my grandparents. He definitely had a blind spot.

      In the case of BXVI, he certainly began to grasp the nettle of abusing clergy - for which he receives little credit. It was he who began to remove credibly accused clerics from ministry whether or not the criminal/civic courts had found them guilty. Thus, their victims were given some form of justice at least.

      MC also has spoken most viciously in the past of Irish people whom also regards en masse as "fools" (his favourite word). Now he shows contempt for elderly people who, along with many others, rightly and properly support the Church.

      It is utter crassness to describe people contributing to the support of the Church as "feeding" a "beast". They are supporting the mission of their local Church which does tremendous good and which requires financial support to be able to carry out its mission. The same is true of the Universal Church. Enormous good and charitable work is done throughout the world by the Catholic Church on every continent. But, of course, that is all viciously written off by this troll.

      There is something truly dysfunctional and almost evil going on with the trolling of this MC who will then run crying and playing the victim when someone gives him a dose of his own medicine.

      MC is a loudmouth bombastic bully and Pat Buckley allows him to troll to his heart's content. I believe this troll has trolled on other blogs and sites too employing the exact same tactics.

      The troll is also very protective of his identity of course. Wouldn't you think this troll, with his enormous and infallible insight into world and ecclesial affairs, would want to patent his solutions? People like Sean Page deserve respect because they are out in the open - not abusing and trolling. Most people in this site are anonymous but they are not continuously abusing others and all they hold most sacred and precious, in the most vicious terms they can muster. This is what the troll MC does and is allowed free range to do.

      Bizarre. Now, let's get ready for the splurge of vitriol this criticism will draw forth from Troll MC.

      Delete
    4. I do not know who MC is. I do not know where he lives - or even if he is a "he".

      I have never met him.

      You make many valid points.

      I will not allow MC or any other comment maker to abuse you. If they want to argue with your points that is fine.

      What about John Paul 11 and Marciel Maciel?

      Delete
    5. I suspect that despite the many red herrings he has used Magna Carta is in fact a serving priest in the RC tradition. He is probably in his early sixties and has been disillusioned for many years. To his fellow clerics he probably resents as disgruntled and highly critical of the church structure but beyond this negativity he is too docile to do anything about it.
      He has found in this blog a forum for all his real thoughts and feelings which he can give free rein to under the cloak of anonomity. He probably drinks a lot, the evidence for which can be seen in many of his more colourful posts,. He is a deeply frustrated individual who feels he has wasted his life. I suspect he does no work beyond that which he cannot avoid absolutely. We should pray for him.

      Delete
    6. Yes, Pat, Maciel is a case in point of JPII's blind spot and his not "getting" abuse by clerics. I don't believe there is any excuse for it but, let's face it, sexual abuse is beyond the ken of many many people. We expect better of the Church and of a a Pope but infallibility is an extremely limited and specific charism.

      And, let's not forget, the first thing BXVI did when he became Pope was to remove Marciel Mariel!

      This MC character (he tells us he is a "he" and that he has several doctorates - but who knows?), savagely attacked, not so long ago, poor old Benny "the German" as a "Nazi", trying to tell us that "a fourteen year old is not a child"!!!! Blaming a fourteen year old schoolboy for being forced to join Hitler Youth gives us quite an insight into the nature of Troll MC. Utterly utterly unreasonable and unhinged by his furious hatred of the Catholic Church.

      I really do hope that you will keep this troll in check, Pat. I think it is a summary and most revealing that he does not trust even you with his identity despite his making so much use of your facilities.

      You really are left intrigued as to what this very bitter and angry former seminarian is so anxious to hide!

      Delete
    7. Pat calling someone moronic is an insult. MC is obviously capable of being polite and restrained when it suits him or enough people call him out. Now, days later, his usual insults are back. I actually don't think MC is the problem, Pat, I think it is your determination to make minimal cuts to posts here and take minimal action to enforce standards of good behaviour. I was one of MC's sympatbisers myself, until he treated me to a barrage of insults which destroyed the valid point I was making.
      Somebody asked yesterday where MC got his PhD from. He doesn't have one, or he'd be capable of nuanced argument. If he has somehow acquired one, it shows up his tantrums and invective on here for the bad behaviour they are.
      He routinely insults elderly people. As it happens he's not in the first flush of youth himself - if you Google 'magna carta google profile' the first result (on a google product forum page) shows a man of his demographics, i.e. old enough to have been at Maynooth in the eighties.
      As the poster above said, bring on the vitriol.
      Pat, I have said this to you before - despite rubbishing what you are trying to do, your enemies in the hierarchy would love to see you alone, shut down, whatever. The easiest way for them to do that is to introduce trolls like MC to make your blog look a haven for nut cases. If you don't stop his behaviour you will lose what following you've got because his tactic is to turn on everyone here and alienate them

      Delete
    8. @Psyche man - I agree. Lonely man, who drinks, masturbates and is sexually ambivalent (he talks of using women but easily lapses into gay vernacular and mostly talks about sex as a thing lived by other people and - revealingly - has a favourite insult of whore). This exactly describes many a priest.

      Delete
    9. @12:27 - you have put into words my thoughts on MC for a quite some time. Except, I think MC is probably closer to 50 than 60 - given the timeframe of his period in Maynooth.

      To be quite honest, listening to his rants, at times, there comes to mind a certain plummy-voiced cleric, who could well be revealing and giving vent to, indeed, his true feelings.

      The "Magna Carta" cloak allows him to give free range to his true feelings on every issue that he is constrained from giving in his usual life.

      I also suspect that his much vaunted and robust heterosexuality is a red herring too - indicative of a deeply conflicted individual.

      Indeed he needs our prayers!

      Delete
    10. Thanks for the bellylaugh, chaps.😅

      Delete
    11. At 12:44, nail on head in your analysis of MC! A few people know who is. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes lol

      Delete
    12. I always assumed Magna Carta was a woman due to the shrill and hysterical tone of his posts (sorry, ladies - no offence meant). Then he told us he is a man and a red blooded heterosexual at that, with lots of notches on his bedpost, from his misspent youth. When I heard that, I couldn't help but think of comedienne Catherine Tate's character Derek - "what gay dear me dear gay dear no dear" Lol

      Delete
    13. Troll MC is definitely racist. He has even called Pope Francis an "oily spic" in the past. Totally unacceptable.

      Delete
    14. @13:17 If people know who Magna Carta is and they know that his intent in posting here is malicious at the least I think tbey should let Pat know. It is his blog which is spammed by this individual.
      As for education, I told myself I wouldn't make the obvious joke about 'Magna Carta wanted an STD but nobody would give him one'. Oh damn, there I go.

      Delete
    15. MMM, I respect you, and your points of view.

      You are right, and I apologise for my extreme and ageist expressions. But I do not apologise for the fundamental point that it is indeed mostly the complaisant elderly who fund the kind of hedonistic extravagance found in Rome and (much nearer home) on Somerton Road, in Belfast.

      Delete
  3. To be fair, Francis replaced Bertone six months after his election.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But Bertone can do what he wants, especially with money.

      Where did a cardinal get millions?

      Delete
  4. Renovating buildings is the least of their worries. Why one person needs such a grandeous place beats me. Perhaps it takes attention off the more sinister stuff. The Italian state should prosicute if necessary

    ReplyDelete
  5. Pat I suppose Timothy is wrong about homosexuality?

    The law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, for those who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted (1 Timothy 1: 8-11).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well to be fair,Some say that Jesus never mentioned homosexuality. Well, He never mentioned rape, or incest, or sexual abuse of minors either, and His “silence” in these matters should certainly not be taken as approval. Further, Jesus said that whoever hears His apostles hears Him (see Luke 10:16), and the Epistles of the Apostles clearly mention homosexual acts and exclude them along with fornication, adultery, and all sexual impurity.

      Delete
    2. That translation is an anachronism. The writer did not have the modern concept of homosexuality. It's clear the passage is concerned with actions. For the author all people were naturally directed towards sexual engagement with the other sex. For someone to go against their nature, as it was then understood, was as wrong as all the other actions listed.

      Today we understand same sex attraction in a completely diffetent way - not as something which is chosen - but rather as something we are born with, like the colour of our eyes.

      Delete
    3. Get a grip @ 11:00, it is a lifestyle choice that will never be compatible with the Abrahamic faiths.

      Delete
    4. Actually, he does have a 'grip', on scriptural understanding, and it is much firmer than yours.

      Homosexuality, as an orientation, is neither known nor understood in Scripture, which is why it is either ritually or morally condemned.

      According to Romans, Paul clearly conceives same-sex relations not as unnatural (the translation here is inaccurate), but as uncustomary and something which straight men and women choose to engage in ('exchange natural for unnatural'). A genuine homosexual cannot exchange a heterosexual orientation for a homosexual one.

      The ancients (including perhaps Paul) considered same-sex relations as the result of excessive heterosexual lust. Other prominent figures in the early Church thought likewise.

      Delete
    5. Well magna, I believe homosexuality was known as the greeks and romans gave us the word and terminology. Did you actually go to college? Or is it just a Wikipedia based education you splatter over this blog.

      Delete
    6. Same-sex BEHAVIOUR was known, yes, but not homosexuality; you, like many others, have confused the two.

      The word 'homosexual' wasn't coined until the latter half of the 19th century, so homosexuality conceptually, as a distinct orientation on the spectrum of human sexuality, was neither known nor understood as it is nowadays.

      Did you bother to read Paul's words in Romans? He clearly was not writing about homosexuality, but about same-sex behaviour, which he, like many ancients, considered an aberration from what was customary for males and females. Paul was writing about same-sex activity among people he considered what we today call 'heterosexual'. Read his words again, but with greater care, and more intelligence, than you have shown so far.

      The ancient Greeks expected young men engaging in sexual relationships with younger males eventually to give up these relationships and settle for conventional, male-female ones. If they continued in same-sex relationships beyond a certain age, they were, by the standard of the time, judged as deviant.

      The ancient Romans had strict laws governing who could be involved with whom in same-sex relationships, but normative male-female relationships were more prized.

      In all these cultural situations, while same-sex activity was accepted, it was not considered to be a separate sexuality, but a deviation from from normative male-female sexual behaviour that was looked upon favourably, for a time (especially among the ancient Greeks), and strictly regulated.

      Delete
    7. I know that greek history and indeed the language is beyond you but please read the greek. They are clear about homosexuality as were the romans. Stop rewriting and misinterpreting well established historical facts.

      Delete
    8. Nuanced, historically accurate comment from MC. Still manages to piss over it by getting in an insult to the other person's intelligence though.

      Delete
    9. The Church does not condemn the homosexual condition/same sex attraction. It is genital activity outside of the marriage covenant that is condemned in Sacred Scripture. Sexual acts with either males or females (apart from ones wife) is prohibited by the Word of God and are sinful.

      Delete
    10. 22:43, you appear at least moderately intelligent, unlike most commentors on this blog.

      Delete
    11. Magma, the benefit of my anonymity means that you don't always know who you're talking to. This is one of a number of times you've referred to my intelligence and other attributes and is the only middling one. At various other times you've called me an idiot, complimented my wit, said I was brilliant, called me old, and expressed the opinion that I am closeted. Where you got the last one really baffled me because it had no relation to the subject at the time. I can only assume it was projection.
      I'm also guessing you think I'm moderately intelligent because I can at least spot what you're doing above. You're making a sensible comment which is still a dig at the person it's aimed at.
      As for your sympathisers on here, I think they should get wise to how much you despise them, because that sympathy is what enables you simultaneously to piss over Pat's blog.

      Delete
    12. 08:41, you, obviously, have good days and bad days: times when you shine, and times when you don't.

      Delete
    13. Magna where did you get your phd from?

      Delete
    14. 22:37, you might want to rephrase your insult of me: 'I know that greek (sic) history and indeed the language is beyond you but please read the greek (sic).'

      If Greek is indeed 'beyond' me, then how on Earth could I follow your plea, to 'read the greek (sic)'?

      Delete
    15. It is not an insult. Merely pointing out that you need to read the greek translation, which evidently you do not. Go figure out the greek translation and use that little drunken angry little brain instead of Wikipedia. Now that is an insult.

      Delete
    16. 15:48, I think you should have said 'English translation of the Greek' rather than 'greek (sic) translation'. Otherwise your point is, well, pointless.

      I have the grace not to reciprocate with the obvious insult: 'It's all Greek to you, isn't it?'

      (Seems some of us are naturally confused, with
      no need for a surfeit of alcohol.)

      Delete
    17. Again you are completely missing the point. Since you are unable to to read the original greek there is no point in engaging with you. I would love to know where this magical phd of yours came from. You have a poor BA at best, probably in sociology and anthropology. That is the height of your classical education. Enjou the beer fueled rants with Wikipedia. It is not greek to you x

      Delete
  6. Several days ago someone queried the income and conditions of retired priests.
    I also, have heard that in some dioceses, such men are living in poverty.
    Bishop, would you not consider this subject is worthy of investigation?

    ReplyDelete
  7. It is beyond question that there is a deep malaise within the curia of Rome. What has evolved in Rome through the centuries is a self-serving bureaucracy a place where careerist clerics play the game while climbing the greasy pole. It is a world populated by men with titles like Eminence, Excellency, Your Grace, My Lord, Monsignor etc. where deference is the path to elevation. It is a world largely out of touch with the realities of peoples lives, somewhat akin to the court of Louis at Versailles.
    Pope Francis knows all this and in a famous christmas address to the curia some two years ago outlined the diseases which have infiltrated. He has however powerful opposition who have been manipulating his predecessors for centuries and they have mustered the troops in a war of silent opposition. Muller was too open in his resistance and has been given the boot, others however continue to cow-tow before Il Papa while hating his guts.
    In times past a little poison in the papal corn flakes would have solved the problem but this Pope has scuppered that path by choosing to live in the community of Domus Martha, mass poisoning would attract too much attention.
    Francis is becoming frustrated as can be evidenced in his off the cuff interviews and I wouldn't be surprised if he were to abdicate the papacy and return to Argentina.
    The church needs a Francis in the spirit of the friar of Asissi - Pope Francis is that man. God give him strength and endurance to rid your church of evil and corruption.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 11.56
    Now why wd a retired priest live in poverty, they are meant to live spartan lives by nature of their own choice
    If an older person need help we have reasonable social care here, nothing to write home about, but still adequate.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Pat, you are very defensive re: your income, about which you are not telling the truth. I have been told you can charge 500 euro ir pounds for weddings!! Your information bout Diocesan priests is totally incorrect: income varies hugely depending on the Diocese you belong to. But you are exaggerating income figures to protect yoursel and to plant the belief that priests are rolling in it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @12:46 What an eloquent exposition of the illness of the Curia.
    Duplicitous clerics liked Martin of tours..aka Duarmuid, decry clericalism in the church while manipulating the system to advance their cronies. In Diarmuid's case a lack lustre fellow called Paul Tighe now ensconsed in a Roman dicastery with the title Excellency and the wearer of a mitre. While talking the talk about the laity Duarmuid operates in the mode of John Charles McQuaid and forests his clergy like indentured slaves. Such men who speak out of both sides of their mouths are despicable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I fully agree 14:19 and DM is not alone in that behaviour. Unfortunately the system that sees men appointed Bishops is a very incestous one, in the sense that bishops make bishops. It tends to be toadies, the likes of Timmy boy Bartlett who lick so many asses who are appointed.
      In Dublin it seems DM is pushing his spineless sidekick Paul Callan as his protege . Poor Callan couldn't make a decision to save his life, but he has been an obedient doormat for DM and it seems he will be rewarded. There are other who fawn over him and delusionally imagine that they are in the running - lackeys like Ciaran McDermot and Laughing Larry (Behan) from Bray - but in private unguarded moments DM has ridiculed them as morons. He is a cynical man who has no qualms about using people as he wills.

      Delete
    2. You are obviously an informed source.
      Pope Francis spoke early in his pontificate about the scandal of 'airport bishops' who jet around the world instead of tending to their own flock. If ever there was an airport bishop DM fits the bill.
      If you read his latest foreign talk in Wurzburg you'd wonder whether it was he who wrote it or his retired journalist brother. It reads as a social commentary on Irish faith, it's written as though he was a dispassionate observer rather than one wit responsibility before God. He's a great man for naming the problems but has done ZILCH to address them. Roll on his 75th birthday. I'll pay for the fireworks that night!

      Delete
    3. Yes, a cynical and crass user of people - that is Archbishop Diarmuid Questionmark to a tee. Paul Callan is his little pussy cat. Archbishop Questionmark doesn't believe in God. I wonder why he doesn't think Gorgeous is a moron?

      Delete
    4. Auld Letterkenny Catholic15 July 2017 at 17:28

      14.19 Archbishop Montini praised John Charles before the Vatican council for the high degree of lay participation in catholic life in Dublin . Mind you as pope paul he helped get rid of John Charles as soon as humanly possible.
      Dermot Martin has presided over a continuous collapse in practice in the diocese while publically whinging and wringing his hands as if it had nothing to do with him.

      Delete
    5. 16.10 I will provide the wine. Dublin PP

      Delete
  11. and Pat, do you get the Old Age Pension yet?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Started getting it in May after 41 years of paying tax and a Self Employed National Insurance Stamp.

      Delete
    2. Thats horse manure Pat

      Delete
    3. @15.57
      Steady on with your use of the long outdated term "Old Age" Pension!! I believe the correct non-ageist term is the "State Pension" Since it is thankfully available to a man(at the moment - -) aged just 65,it would no longer be considered appropriate to describe it as "Old Age" Pension. Many years ago of course, 65 would have been considered "old age" but nowadays there is longer life expectation and I don't think too many of my hardworking - and supremely active - - friends in their late sixties and early seventies would take too kindly to the old label of fifty years ago! I don't know how other people - perhaps posters in late middle age feel about this?

      Delete
    4. I agree.

      In fact the actual name of it is STATE PENSION.

      Delete
    5. 16.32 I suppose you are one of the old fogeys taking up free seats on the buses and trains. That's whilst the rest of us subsidise your fares by actually having to pay and scramble on board to try and find an empty seat.

      Delete
    6. @18.03
      Either that - - - - or I am a young person with a bit of respect for my elders who paid their taxes and bus fares for years before I was born.

      Delete
  12. It's no ones business how much Pat has or gets
    People usually give whatever they can afford.
    You shouldn't bother posting silly comments, Pat.

    ReplyDelete
  13. There seems to be someone preoccupied today about your finances and financial situation. Frankly I find such questions rude. I know you are good at answering them but I question the motive behind such invasive questioning. Maybe a disgruntled Cleric perhaps who wouldn't dream of talking about their own cosy financial arrangements.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Well we don't want to see Pat in penury no do we?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Pat gets sick he will go on the NHS waiting list.

      He has no private health scheme paid for by the Church.

      Delete
    2. I doubt if you are strapped for cash my Lordship!!Doubt it very much....if you have little it doesn't justify your self righteous condemnation of others. You obviously don't have a big congregation. Or perhaps they are mean with offerings!! Anyway, stop being motivated on your blog by bitterness and jealousy of Roman Catholic clerics. Can't be good for your psychological well being.

      Delete
  15. Dear sir/madam @ 11 19,
    So same-sex attraction is a lifestyle choice.

    Be careful with the way you use words apparently so easily.

    Think of the young teenage boy or girl who may be reading this blog, You child, or grandchild perhaps, or neice or nephew. They may be becoming aware of such attraction which may not be a smooth journey for them. And now it's compounded by words such as yours. They chose this feature of their life, did they!

    If they did why do so many of them have suicidal thoughts?

    I suppose you chose your gender and skin colour.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So it is ok for active homosexuals to receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church?

      Delete
    2. As a Priest, if I knew someone who was actively homosexual and they came up for Holy Communion I would offer it to them. Simple. There are many actively gay Clergy like me celebrating the Mass.

      Delete
    3. Well said, 16:16.

      Your words are wise and compassionate.

      Delete
    4. @18:18, they should not present themselves for Holy Communion in am ideal world, in an ideal world active homosexual priests would be removed from ministry. However, we do not live in am ideal world. That said, if a person wishes to place their souls at risk by receiving the poor Lord, well that is their prerogative.

      Delete
  16. @16.12
    Yes, I agree that the financial interrogation is very unseemly.
    But sometimes the rudest people don't even realise that they are being rude!

    ReplyDelete
  17. "The Eucharist is not a prize for the perfect but medicine and nourishment for the weak."
    Pope Francis

    What's your view? And how do you substantiate it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are correct in the sense that no-one can ever be truly worthy of receiving the Blessed Eucharist. It is a wonderful gift and a privilege of which we could never be worthy.
      But that does not mean that we should not try to make the best spiritual preparation beforehand of attitude of penitence and the best thanksgiving afterwards that we possibly can. We should certainly be aware that it is "food for our souls" and receive it with thoughtful reverence in that frame of mind. It is the most important and profound moment of our day(or week).
      We should also never forget the words of Holy Scripture that he who "receives the Body and Blood of the Lord unworthily is guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord"
      (Many hairs have been split over passages like that one in St Paul, Corinthians 1 but nevertheless, the meaning is clear no matter how much we try to water it down)

      Delete
    2. The meaning is not at all clear - at least as to how it relates to today's world.

      What does 'unworthily' mean in a society which has developed as ours has, and about which Paul could have had only the vaguest conception?

      Delete
    3. The meaning is clear. Before we receive Holy Communion we should have a strong intention to do so with proper respect and reverence. That includes having sought pardon for serious sin in the Sacrament of Reconciliation and a firm intention to put that sin or occasion of sin in the past. If by grace of God we have not serious sin, then we should meditate for a few minutes on where we could improve our relationship with God and our fellow man. We should spend a few moments in thanksgiving afterwards.
      God's Word doesn't go out of date.
      Yes, our society has certainly grown away from God.
      Sin is sin - we have simply "developed" new ways of committing it. Any new development can be used for either good or evil and in the end, it will usually be used for both. . This was true of say, the printing oress, television, the Internet, films etc.
      St Paul could never have envisaged any of these things!
      So the fact remains. We must be quite clear from where our morality springs and of our own code of conduct. In that way, we won't be like a rudderless boat swayed by the unpredictable winds of every new "progressive" fad and idea that hits our society. That can take vigilance.
      It certainly takes effort!

      Delete
    4. 12:17, you sound like someone who would be very hard to live with. (And I thought I was difficult!)

      Delete
    5. 12:17, I worry about people who set too much store by fallible human beings, people like you. And we all are fallible, even Magna Carta. Why even popes and apostles, like dear old Paul!

      Did you know that Paul set himself up as the arbiter of who would, and who would not, enter 'the Kingdom'? That's right: Paul was deluded, and megalomaniacal enough, to belive that he was God's ontological equivalent, like many Church 'leaders' since.

      By Paul's 'inerrant' will such people as drunkards, thieves, homosexuals (this was later changed to 'practising homosexuals' by an 'inerrant' Church) will not enter the Kingdom. So there!

      However, 'drunkards' would, of course, include alcoholics, people who are objectively addicted: 'ill', in other words. Thank God that God doesn't condemn the sick. His 'followers'? Yes. But God? No.

      Yes 12:17,I think someone like you would be very difficult to live with, like your judgemental, fallible heroes, Paul, and the useless rest.

      Let's hope that God himself doesn't find it too difficult to live with people like you.

      Delete
    6. Thanks to @ 12.17
      Excellent and sincere..

      Delete
    7. I think God will have no difficulty at all, Magna, welcoming into His Kingdom someone like that sincere poster at 12.17 who during his life did his best to respect the Blessed Eucharist and encouraged others to do the same.
      Perhaps the poster wouldn't particularly find you easy to live with either!
      I won't prolong this discussion with you.... sorry...

      Delete
    8. 14:16, considering your comment, 12:17 isn't the only one who would be difficult with.

      Delete
  18. Listen darling at 16.34
    Anyone can receive holy communion, just go to the altar at any mass.
    It's up to your own conscience if you worthy
    No I'm not gay, I'm one off the grannies here.
    Why you need to ask silly questions beats me.
    And to whoever is questioning Pat, shut up and go away, anyone can give cash to anyone...even me...I don't have to answer to any tax man
    I paid my tax every month for 45 years, and yes even now they take tax out of my pension

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ps yes I know Pat was refused communion, but he is a well known personality.
    ARE YOU as well known ?.... no I thought not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have been refused Holy Communion by two bishops in my life:

      Phonsie "The Righteous" Cullinan in Waterford.

      and

      Archbishop Marcel Le Lefebvre at a Mass in Belfast.

      In future I will bring my own Holy Communion with me :-) validly "confected" of course.

      Delete
    2. You are excommunicated. Why on earth would you presume to present yourself for Holy Communion when you are not entitled to receive. You are not a well man. And to bring "Holy Communion" with you is an abuse.

      Delete
    3. Pat, how can you give yourself Communion within a Mass being said by someone else.

      Delete
    4. I can give myself Communion anywhere, anytime.

      Delete
    5. It is arrogant to presume.. Please do not do it.

      Delete
    6. You really don't get it Pat do you? You can't make up the rules as you go along. Priests are custodians not owners of the sacraments and they MUST adhere to the laws of the church.

      Delete
  20. I only know of one priest who actually knows me
    He is a relative
    I'm sure most celebrants of the mass never look at the people receiving.
    Question, pat?
    Why didn't you go to receive to one of the lay ministers?
    I'm sure you could have received incognito !!!!

    ReplyDelete
  21. 18.18
    Are you Fr x?
    So the laity are keeping your sexlife financially active?
    Today now 2017 I haven't seen anywhere within the Rc church that parishioners are expected to finance your lifestyle.
    You are living against the Rc celibate rules
    Until the rules change you are in conflict with your vocation
    I wd not want to receive communion from you.
    Pat is legit, he is not an Rc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ask yourself how many Clergy will be in the gay saunas in Dublin and Belfast tonight not including the gay clubs and pubs. Then they will slink back to their Parishes in the morning for Masses tomorrow and out doing it all over again tomorrow night. When you receive Holy Communion tomorrow just think about where those hands have been. Wake up, smell the coffee and get yourself into the real world.

      Delete
    2. A few might have been in those sinful places. The vast majority will have been in their presbyteries doing absolutely no harm, going to bed alone and sleeping. Do not tar all priests on account of the sins of a minority.

      Delete
  22. Pat, I hadn't heard about the first time you were refused communion, but I found this on the SSPX site:

    ".... It was in this simple hut that Archbishop Lefebvre said Mass in 1989 packed as it was with media reporters. It is remembered for the failed attempt by the notorious modernist, Fr. Pat Buckley, to receive Holy Communion from His Grace who had been forewarned by Fr. Couture...."

    Full link is here: http://fsspx.ie/en/stpiusv

    It would be interesting to hear more about this story directly from the "notorious modernist".

    ReplyDelete
  23. Does Holy Communion not require belief in the Eucharist? If you are not in Communion with the teaching of Christ e.g. an active homosexual, why present yourself for something that is opposed to your way of life. Let's hand out the Body fo Christ with zero love for the Real Presence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Has it occurred to you that there may not be any contradiction between the teaching of Christ and being, as you say, an active homosexual, any more than there is a contradiction between the teaching of Christ and being an active heterosexual?

      Have you concluded there is because you thought the matter through yourself?

      Or, because someone told you when you were a child or an impressionable young adult?

      If I remember the teaching of Jesus can be summed up in two phrases: love God and love your neighbour as yourself.

      The person with same-sex attraction has to struggle to love their partner in exactly the same way as the person with other-sex attraction, except that it may be harder because the one doesn't have the societal supports that the other has.

      So before presuming to know who has love for the Real Presence and who hasn't take a long pause and do some thinking - and some looking around you.

      Delete
  24. I suspect Magna Carter is boltholed in the USA possibly - where you can buy doctorates'. I think many of the comments regarding mindset are accurate except I think he is afraid of women as many priests are. I say this as a woman. Magna you have gone astray again!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And how afraid. I think you'll find he's in these islands somewhere, though. Of course you're right that that is the only way he would get a doctorate. Getting a real doctorate requires prolonged work over years. MC is incapable of that kind of application. He would get pissed and bawl out his supervisor or something.
      Funny how he goes quiet when commenters here get close to his identity, almost as if he's got something to hide...

      Delete
  25. 18.18 You are a disgrace to the Priesthood, your Masses are sacrilege and an affront to God. You are nothing but scum, sitting in your big house in luxury funded by the people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like many people in all kinds of houses I live in the kitchen and bedroom.

      Delete
  26. I wouldn't describe Pat as a "notorious modernist" rather an "ignoble anarchist" when you dismiss the authority of the church to teach you place yourself outside the community of Christ's faithful.

    ReplyDelete
  27. No Pat, read St Paul on the church as his body. You are merely a cancer that has been excised

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The corrupt Roman Institution is no more the Body of Christ than the Trump Administration is.

      By their fruits shall ye know them - Bertone, Pell, Abuse, Magdalen alaundries, Tuam Babies, Gaynooth and on and on and on.......

      Delete
    2. Yes Bishop Pat, how could a good tree produce such putrid fruit? I'm afraid old Rome is rotten to the core and her blinkered followers will not acknowledge how bad it is.

      Delete
  28. Forget Rome. Please concentrate on scandal closer to home. Remember, 'when the cat's away the mice will play'. They need someone in authority like you, or they'll return to their filthy ways at Maynooth.

    ReplyDelete
  29. The world is full of people who are happy to curse the darkness.
    But the really valuable ones are those who are still brave enough to light one candle...

    ReplyDelete
  30. Pat, you ignore all the wonderful works of the church through centuries. You really are blinkered by your hatred.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MourneManMichael16 July 2017 at 01:43

      Could you please help us understand more about the 'wonderful works of the church through centuries'?
      I ask that in order that I, and others, can weigh up and balance the pros and cons of the RC church's positives against negatives some might raise, such as the Inquisition, Crusades, and more locally, the Magdalene launderies and similar now discredited RC church behaviours.
      I do hope you can offer a positive and objective appraisal to deny the opportunity for detractors to denigrate your position.
      MMM

      Delete
  31. MMM, do your own research. Look at the many wonderful religious orders founded to care for the poorest, dispossessed and marginalised. Look at Trocaire's work: Br. Kevin Crowley's Day Care Centre: Sr. Consilio's Cuan Mhuire Centres: Sr. Stan Kennedy's Focus Ireland: Fr. McVerry's Trust...Look at the amazing work of missionary sisters in education, health care, social outreach in the poorest parts of the world. Yes, of course the institutional church abused its power and prestige, but you will also find a wonderfully rich historical legacy of lasting goidness which rarely make headline news. If you really want to you will also find such goodness in your own community. Don't depend in this blig through Pat to tell the truth.

    ReplyDelete